SchaeferSchwalmWilliamsEtAl2012

Référence

Schaefer, K., Schwalm, C.R., Williams, C., Arain, M.A., Barr, A., Chen, J.M., Davis, K.J., Dimitrov, D., Hilton, T.W., Hollinger, D.Y., Humphreys, E., Poulter, B., Raczka, B.M., Richardson, A.D., Sahoo, A.K., Thornton, P., Vargas, R., Verbeeck, H., Anderson, R., Baker, I., Black, T.A., Bolstad, P., Chen, J., Curtis, P.S., Desai, A.R., Dietze, M., Dragoni, D., Gough, C., Grant, R.F., Gu, L., Jain, A., Kucharik, C., Law, B.E., Liu, S., Lokipitiya, E., Margolis, H.A., Matamala, R., McCaughey, J.H., Monson, R., Munger, J.W., Oechel, W., Peng, C., Price, D.T., Ricciuto, D.M., Riley, W.J., Roulet, N., Tian, H., Tonitto, C., Torn, M., Weng, E. and Zhou, X. (2012) A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the North American Carbon Program site synthesis. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 117(3):G03010.

Résumé

Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate).

Format EndNote

Vous pouvez importer cette référence dans EndNote.

Format BibTeX-CSV

Vous pouvez importer cette référence en format BibTeX-CSV.

Format BibTeX

Vous pouvez copier l'entrée BibTeX de cette référence ci-bas, ou l'importer directement dans un logiciel tel que JabRef .

@ARTICLE { SchaeferSchwalmWilliamsEtAl2012,
    AUTHOR = { Schaefer, K. and Schwalm, C.R. and Williams, C. and Arain, M.A. and Barr, A. and Chen, J.M. and Davis, K.J. and Dimitrov, D. and Hilton, T.W. and Hollinger, D.Y. and Humphreys, E. and Poulter, B. and Raczka, B.M. and Richardson, A.D. and Sahoo, A.K. and Thornton, P. and Vargas, R. and Verbeeck, H. and Anderson, R. and Baker, I. and Black, T.A. and Bolstad, P. and Chen, J. and Curtis, P.S. and Desai, A.R. and Dietze, M. and Dragoni, D. and Gough, C. and Grant, R.F. and Gu, L. and Jain, A. and Kucharik, C. and Law, B.E. and Liu, S. and Lokipitiya, E. and Margolis, H.A. and Matamala, R. and McCaughey, J.H. and Monson, R. and Munger, J.W. and Oechel, W. and Peng, C. and Price, D.T. and Ricciuto, D.M. and Riley, W.J. and Roulet, N. and Tian, H. and Tonitto, C. and Torn, M. and Weng, E. and Zhou, X. },
    TITLE = { A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the North American Carbon Program site synthesis },
    JOURNAL = { Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences },
    YEAR = { 2012 },
    VOLUME = { 117 },
    PAGES = { G03010 },
    NUMBER = { 3 },
    ABSTRACT = { Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate). },
    KEYWORDS = { gross primary productivity model performance modeling 0414 Biogeosciences: Biogeochemical cycles, processes, and modeling (0412, 0793, 1615, 4805, 4912) 0428 Biogeosciences: Carbon cycling (4806) 1622 Global Change: Earth system modeling (1225, 4316) 1631 Global Change: Land/atmosphere interactions (1218, 1843, 3322) 1852 Hydrology: Plant uptake },
    OWNER = { amriv2 },
    TIMESTAMP = { 2012.08.23 },
}

********************************************************** ***************** Facebook Twitter *********************** **********************************************************

Abonnez-vous à
l'Infolettre du CEF!

********************************************************** ***************** Pub - Mycorhizes_2019 ****************** **********************************************************

********************************************************** ***************** Pub - Symphonies_Boreales ****************** **********************************************************

********************************************************** ***************** Boîte à trucs *************** **********************************************************

CEF-Référence
La référence vedette !

Jérémie Alluard (2016) Les statistiques au moments de la rédaction 

  • Ce document a pour but de guider les étudiants à intégrer de manière appropriée une analyse statistique dans leur rapport de recherche.

Voir les autres...